HERITAGE FLORIDA JEWISH NEWS, JANUARY 13, 2012 PAGE 5A L
By Gary Rosenblatt
The New York Jewish Week
Before there was Birthright
Israel. the most successful
Jewish communal effort
to increase Jewish identity
among young people, there
was The Israel Experience.
a like-minded effort--and
acknowledged failure.
Jeffrey Solomon. president
of the Andrea and Charles
Bronfman Family Philan-
thropies, recalls that Charles
Bronfman announced the
launch of The Israel Experi-
ence in 1992. amid great
fanfare, at the major annual
convention of North Ameri-
can Jewish federations.
An experiment to bring
large numbers of high school
students to Israel. it was a
partnership of major Jewish
organizations working with
Bronfman's foundation, with
the wildly unrealistic target of
attracting 50,000 Jewish teens
a year to eight-week summer
programs.
"It was an utter failure." but
also a "noble" one. says Solo-
mon la member of the board of
directors of The Jewish Week),
asserting that the success of
Birthright, which began seven
years later, was "built directly"
on what went wrong with The
Israel Experience.
He explained that when he
became the professional head
of the Bronfman foundation in
1997. he undertook an evalu-
ation of the philanthropy's
various programs and dis-
covered that during the years
The Israel Experience was in
operation. "not one more high
school kid went to Israel as
a result of that $19 million
expenditure," primarily spent
on marketing the program.
Solomon says that ev-
erything learned from that
failure--the ideal age of par-
ticipants, cost of the program.
length of time spent in Israel,
structure of the partnership,
evaluation and more di-
rectly led to the success of
Birthright.
It should not come as a
surprise that failure is a key
component of future success.
For centuries it has been the
basic premise of scientific
experimentation, and applies
to a wide range of fields, from
education to business. Recent
examples abound.
The New York Times educa-
tion supplement in September
published a cover story titled.
"What If the SeGret to Success
is Failure?" The report focused
on various efforts to instill
character into students, not-
ing that privileged youngsters
at top academic schools often
lack the growth opportunity
that comes with overcom-
ing a hardship, academic or
otherwise.
Newsweek magazine now
devotes its back page each
week to a column called,
"My Favorite Mistake." with
celebrities telling how some
misfortune or fault on their
part led to a life lessonin
perseverance.
"Start-Up Nation," the best-
seller that describes how tiny
Israel has become a world
leader in innovation, empha-.
sizes how the national culture
values early failures in life,
giving young entrepreneurs.
the fortitude and chutzpah
to succeed.
Is the organized Jewish
community in this country
overly risk-averse when it
comes to spending on new
ventures? Sblomon says such
Funders on page 19A
k
By Suzanne Garment
Jewish Ideas Daily
In a recent issue of Nashim:
A Journal of Jewish Women's
Studies and Gender Issues,
Debra Mesch, director of
the Women's Philanthropy
Institute at Indiana Univer-
sity's Center on Philanthropy,
together with colleagues, has
published an article called.
"Does Jewish Philanthropy
Differ by Sex and Type of
Giving?" This kind of title
tends to turn potential read-
ers into pillars of salt but
if you are serious about the
future of American Jews and
their values, you'll want to
look at Mesch's findings about
intermarriage and generosity.
Will Rogers observed that
"it isn't what we don't know
that gives us trouble, it's what
we know that ain't so." This is
the principle behind modern
survey research, which probes
human opinions and behav-
iors that most. people think
are just common sense. When
survey researchers want to
explain why this sort of thing
is useful, they point to Samuel
Stouffer.
During World War II,
Stouffer surveyed American
servicemen about everything
from class and racial attitudes
to their levels of fear under
enemy fire. His findings be-
came a massive work called
"The American Soldier."
People like historianArthur
Schlesinger dismissed it as a
bunch of "ponderous demon-
strations" of the obvious. For
example, the more educated
the soldier, the more difficult
his adjustment to military
life. Southern soldiers coped
better than Northerners with
Pacific island heat. Southern
black enlistees preferred
Southern white officers to
Northern whites.
These were obvious social
facts but they weren't true.
As sociologist Paul Lazarsfeld
noted in a famous review of
Stouffer's study, the surveys
actually found the opposite.
Poorly educated soldiers had
more, not fewer, adjustment
problems. Southerners hated
the heat as much as Northern-
ers. Black soldiers, in rating
officers, had no use for white
Southern charm.
Garbage in, garbage out:
Before you try to explain
something, make sure you
know the facts about what
the "something" is.
We do know certain things
about the "something" that
constitutes Jewish philan-
thropy: American Jews give
proportionately more than
other Americans. Almost
three-quarters of Jewish con-
tributions go to non-religious
causes. Jews disproportion-
ately give to meet basic human
needs like food and shelter.
But we don!t know much
about the role of gender in
Jewish philanthropy. Indeed,
the most comprehensive
study of American Jewish
philanthropy found that
gender did not~ make much
of a difference.
Dr. Mesch and her col-
leagues went considerably
further. In a sophisticated sur-
vey, they divideda sample into
various types of household
groups Jewish couples, non-
Jewish couples, Jewish man
and non-Jewish woman, Jew-
ish woman and non-Jewish
man, and singles--Jewish and
non=Jewish, male and female.
The researchers managed to
create groups large enough
to make some statistically
significant distinctions.
When the researchers
asked each household about
its giving over the years,
they found some things that
were consistent with previ-
ous studies. For example.
couples with at least one Jew-
ish member were about as
likely as non-Jewish couples
to give to religious causes;
but the Jewish-member
couples were fully 20 percent
more likely to give to secular
causes.
Then the researchers looked
at giving through a finer lens.
controlling for just about
every plausible demographic
variable income, wealth,
education, age, children.
employment, geographic, re-
gion, even health. The results
on religious giving were not
very interesting: Intermarried
couples give less than either
Jewish or non-Jewish house-
holds to religious causes.
(Any other result would have
suggested something screwy
about the data.)
More interesting was secu-
lar giving. In this area. there
would be no reason to expect
intermarried couples to give
less. But the researchers
found that intermarried
couples consisting of a Jew-
ish wife and a non-Jewish
husband were less likely to
give than any other kind of
household except for non-
Jewish single males.
As for the amounts of
the gifts that the house-
holds made, couples made
up of Jewish husbands and
non-Jewish wives gave 118
percent more than the Jew-
ish wives and non-Jewish
husbands. Jewish couples
gave 76 percent more. Non-
Jewish couples gave 52
percent more. Singles gave
more. by 30 to 167 percent.
The researchers analyzed
the types of giving along
different lines, but the find-
ing remained: Jewish women
married to non-Jewish men
gave less than any other type
of household.
This is a new fact that
raises new questions. Does it
happen because these couples
be come separated from Jewish
fundraising networks, which
traditionally rely on male-to-
male connections? Are Jewish
women who marry non-
Jewish men particularly prone
to adopt non-Jewish norms.
which may be less charitable
than Jewish norms?
One thing the researchers
know is that more research
is needed. One thing the rest
of us should face is that the
Jewish charitable impulse,
of which we are so proud and
which we take so much for
granted, may be more tenu-
ous than we have recognized.
Bonds can be broken. The
connections that underlie
" charity may be among them.
This article was first pub-
lished by Jewish Ideas Daily,
www.jewishideasdaily.com;
and is reprinted with per-
mission.
By David Suissa
It never occurred to me
that I'd have to visit the
Los Angeles County Men's
Central Jail to get a deeper
understanding of the haredi
crisis in Israel. I call it a
crisis because, in my mind,
anything that makes the
Jewish religion look really
bad is a crisis. If you look like
a religious Jew, and you spit
on an Orthodox girl because
her dress code doesn't meet
your standard of modesty,
and the ificident is caught
off Israeli television and goes
viral on YouTube. then you
are slandering Judaism and
it's a crisis.
So, here's my message to
religious Jews who publicly
and brazenly humiliate wom-
en and spit in the face of the
Jewish state that feeds them:
Don't slander my religion.
What I witnessed at the
county jail on the last night
of Chanukah, however, was
the opposite of slander. I
was there with my 12-year-
old son and a small group
of local Jews and rabbis
some with long beards and
black hats to light the
Chanukah candles with law-
enforcement officials, and to
bring some holiday comfort
to Jewish inmates.
I had been invited by Chap-
lain Howard Winkler, direc-
tor of the Orthodox Jewish
Chaplaincy Board, who, used
the occasion to hand out
awards. Around long tables
serving up kosher doughnuts,
drinks and dreidels, people
with police badges milled
around, listening to a Jew
in a yarmulke talk about the
inspirational light of Chanu-
kah and the Jewish value of
gratitude.
What could have been
going through their minds?
Here's a group of religious
Jews coming to their jail-
house to honor these public
servants for the difficultwork
they do--and to thank them
for the respect and sensitiv-
ity they show to the Jewish
community and to Jewish
inmates. How could they
not respond positively to this
"religious" ceremony?
As Winkler handed an
award to Sheriff Lee Baca.
I reflected on those images
we've been seeing in the me-
dia- of enraged haredim in
Israel. and I thought: What a
contrast! In Belt Shemesh, a
group of religious Jews says,
"screw you" to the world,
while, in a Los Angeles jail, a
group of religious Jews says
"thank you."
Can you guess which one
better honors the Jewish
religion?
Imagine if a group of
haredim had held a public
ceremony on the last night
of Chanukah, and thanked
the Jewish state for the fi-
nancial support and religious
freedom that allows them to
gorge themselves on their
brand of isolationist, all-you-
can-eat Judaism. Could that
happen?
But instead of showing
gratitude, they have been
insulting and abusing other
Jews who don't think like
them and desecrating the
image of their own God in
the process.
I know, I know, these ex-
tremists are only a minority,
and they don't represent the
vast majority of the haredi
population. But here's the
problem with that argument:
It doesn't work in the real
world, where image is every-
thing. If this vast majority of
haredimkeep quiet and don't
take action against their own
"bad apples" whileworking
to create a more positive im-
age for their community--
they, too, are responsible for
the damage done in their
name.
Any Jew who walks around
with a yarmulke is a walk-
ing billboard for God. And
if you're a haredi who wears
not just a yarmulke but over-
the-top regalia of Eastern
European ghettos, you might
as well be a Jumbotron elec-
tronic billboard on Sunset
Boulevard. As far as the world
goes, you're a Jew on steroids.
You're not .just represent-
ing God, you're wearing God.
The ultra-Orthodox orga-
nization Agudath Israel of
America responded to recent
events by releasing a power-
ful declaration, saying, "We
condemn these acts uncondi-
tionally." But no declaration
can undo a horrible media
image. If the haredi leader-
ship in Israel is serious about
repairing the damage done in
its name to Judaism, instead
of playing power politics and
victimhood, it ought to do
some soul searching about
how it might change its ways.
As Rabbi Yitzchok Adler-
stein wrote in the blog
Cross-Currents, the proper
Jewish way is "one that brings
honor to Hashem and honor
to the one who follows it." A
lifestyle that brings nothing
but contempt upon Torah, he
adds, "cannot legitimately be
Torah."
This is the inevitable re-
sult of extreme isolation:
You lose sight of how your
actions play out in the real
world. Fear of being spiritu-
ally "contaminated" by the
outside world can all too
easily lead to contamination
of your worldview. Like an
antibody that turns on itself,
you become oblivious to the
presence, let alone the value,
of God's other children. And
when you reach the point
of becoming a source of
contempt for What you love
most--God and Torah--you
know you've reached bottom.
But how will the haredim
ever know the impact of their
actions in the real world if
they shun it so obsessively?
Will they invite advertising
executives to their yeshivas
to give them a course on the
dynamics of public image?
Maybe they ought to just
look at the most integrat-
ed black hats in history
Chabad--and study how
these global emissaries have
managed to turntheir Haredi
uniforms into symbols of
love. rather than division
and isolation. It's not a co-
incidence that they live and
breathe in the real world.
In this real world, you visit
jail wardens to say thank you.
And if there are Jews who bother
you, you don't spit on them, you
invite them over for Shabbat.
David Suissa is president
of TRIBE Media Corp.~Jewish
Journal and can be reached at
davids@jewish journaL com.